School of Government and Society

Banner Code: 08 20900 Departmental Code: POLS 214

International Relations Theory
Term 1: Dr George Kyris (G.Kyris@bham.ac.uk)
Term 2: Dr Marco Vieira (m.a.vieira@bham.ac.uk)

Deadlines, extensions, guidance on essay, referencing, plagiarism etc.

Please see One Stop Shop in Canvas

How to get help on the module?

In general, there are two groups of questions that you might face:
For procedural/ practical questions, like information on schedule of seminars/ lectures,
deadlines of assessment, reference style, plagiarism, please see One Stop Shop in Canvas and
if you need more help please contact the Undergraduate Office and Veta Douglas
(V.Douglas@bham.ac.uk) who is responsible for 2nd Years.

For questions of academic nature, such as clarifications on something we discussed in the

lecture, help with the content of your assignment, you can contact the module convenor via email
or my office hours (no need for appointment) during teaching periods and otherwise by
appointment. However, if you have a basic question which is not urgent, it may be easier to
use e-mail and we will respond as soon as possible.

Convenors:
Term1:
Dr George Kyris
Office: 536 Muirhead Tower
Office Hours:

Term 2
Dr Marco Vieira
Office: 334 Muirhead Tower
Office Hours:

Mode of Study: One hour lecture and one hour seminar weekly
Lectures:
Seminar Groups: Students need to sign up for a seminar group via Canvas

Workload
As a general guideline, the University expects students to spend 100 hours on each 10- credit
module. Participants are strongly advised to stick to this workload in order to meet the course
requirements. This means that students are expected to spend about 34 hours per week
preparing for lectures for this module in addition to contact hours, exam preparation, and
essay writing. Being prepared not only saves time when preparing for the exam, but also
makes attendance of and participation in the classes more rewarding.

Absences
Preparation for the course and class attendance is compulsory; compulsory readings must be
prepared in advance of each class. Upon failure to attend class or in case of
attending class unprepared on more than two occasions without prior notification to the
lecturer, the student will be called to the student monitoring committee, which comprises the
Head of Department and the Undergraduate Director.

Essays
You are required to submit an essay engaging with the themes and arguments covered in the
module and showing a good grasp of issues in IR theory.
Choose one of the following questions/themes. When answering the question, you should
draw upon at least one theory that you have studied on the Pols 214 course.

1. Critically discuss the impact that the War on Terror has had in IR Theory.

2. Why is war such an entrenched and recurring phenomenon in international politics?

3. With regard to either poststructuralism or gender, make a critical case for why this is,
or is not, central to the study of international relations.

4. Critical Theory and Constructivism have their place in the academic study of IR, but
are of little use in addressing concrete problems in international relations. Critically
discuss this proposition.

5. Global environmental problems and politics have significantly informed and reshaped
contemporary International Relations theory. Discuss.

7. Develop a postcolonial critique of EITHER/BOTH the end of history OR/AND clash

of civilizations theses.

8. Emerging powers, such as China, India and Brazil, challenge the Western
international order. Discuss.

9. International community is a contradiction in terms. The notion of community only

applies at the national level. Discuss with reference to cosmopolitan and
communitarian arguments.

10. Human rights are particular rather than universal. Discuss with reference to
theoretical arguments about the legitimacy of humanitarian intervention.

11. Multiculturalism is not compatible with the liberal notion of individual rights. Discuss.

12. States and international institutions should be understood primarily in terms of the
functions they perform in supporting global capitalism (Steans, 2010: 107). Discuss.

General reading
We will use two main textbooks, plus additional reading material as identified in the course
schedule. We recommend that you buy at least one of the following textbooks but if you
cannot most of the weekly core readings also include material available free online (for
example, via institutional log in to academic journals). We would like to emphasise that it is
essential that you read beyond the material provided in the following textbook and the core
reading listed:

Steans, J., Pettiford, L., Diez, T., El-Anis, I. 2010, (3 rd edition) Introduction to
International Relations Theory: Perspectives and Themes, London: Pearson.

Note that the library will have a number of copies of previous editions of those books, which
will have different page numbers and sometimes different chapter titles. If you cannot get hold
of the latest edition, you could have a look at the same chapter in previous editions. .

Other useful books are:

Scott Burchill, Andrew Linklater, Richrad Devetak and Jack Donnelly (2009) Theories of
International Relations, London: Palgrave/MacMillan.

Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki and Steve Smith (eds) (2007) Theories of International
Relations: Discipline and Diversity.
Baylis, J. and Smith, S. (eds.) 2014, The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to
International Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press (6 th edition).

As a general source of reference, you will also find the following useful:

Carlsns, W. et al. (eds) 2002, Handbook of International Relations, London:

Sage.

Note that this book is available in the library as reference only.

International Relations/Politics Journals

Often the most up to date sources on various topics covered in the course are found not in
books, but journals. The following are all useful sources:

Review of International Studies

Millennium: Journal of International Studies
British Journal of Politics and International Relations
Global Society
Alternatives
International Studies Quarterly
International Studies Review
International Studies Perspectives
World Politics
Journal of International Relations and Development
Cambridge Review of International Affairs
International Feminist Journal of Politics

Note on the reading list

The readings for each week are split into core and further readings. You should aim to read at
least 1-2 of the core readings, which most of the times include material from the two core
textbooks or material available online for free. They can be found in the main librarys short
loan section unless otherwise specified (e.g. if an article is available on the WWW). However,
we have usually listed more literature than we expect you to have read in recognition that in
some cases it may be difficult to obtain a copy from the library of each text in such a large
group of students. If you cannot get hold of core readings, you should go to further reading.
The latter are there primarily for you to consult if you are particularly interested in a specific
subject, if you are writing an essay on this topic, or for future reference in other second and
third year international politics courses. It is your responsibility to have done the required
reading.

SCHEDULE OF LECTURES

FIRST SEMESTER

Lecturer: Dr. George Kyris

Week 1 Introduction to the Module

This introductory lecture will review traditional theories of IR, the extent to which they offer
explanations of international politics based on certain taken for granted assumptions, and the
problems this poses for a deeper understanding of international politics in theory and practice.
Traditional theories start from a fairly familiar picture of international politics as dominated by
states and perhaps a few other non-governmental actors, and in which interests, and often
more specifically the national interest, have been the driving force. Recent theoretical
developments challenge the basis on which traditional theories have been constructed to
explain the world, and seek to reconstruct IR in a different way. This raises questions about
what theories are for, and so this lecture will alert you to the different purposes of theory. It will
also argue that the assumptions underlying any given theory will make us see the world in a
particular way. This lecture will also introduce the relationship between theory and practice
and its significance for contemporary IR theory.

Learning outcomes
You should become familiar with the overall content, structure and way of assessment of
the module.
You should understand the different purposes of theory and issues like epistemology,
ontology and methodology.
You should appreciate the significance of issues of power/knowledge for
contemporary IR theory and the relationship between theory and practice.

Seminar and Readings

There is no seminar in week one and therefore there is no particular reading. If you want, you
can have a look at introduction chapters of textbooks and you should use this week to
familiarise yourself with the module guide and the Canvas site.

Week 2 Reconsidering IR

This lecture will begin by briefly revisiting and reviewing traditional theories of IR which are
encountered IR courses, especially Realism Liberalism and the Neo-Neo debate. Next, the
lecture will move on to the post-positivist challenge in IR and the variety of conceptual
approaches which relate to it and which we will be looking at during next weeks.

You should refresh your understanding of Realism and Liberalism as the grand theories of
IR and the Neo-Neo debate.
You should understand the differences between positivism and post-positivist approaches
and be able to identify some of the most major approaches and themes of each camp

Core reading
Steans, J. and Pettiford, L, Diez, T., El-Anis, I. 2010, Introduction to International Relations
Theory: Perspectives and Themes, London: Pearson. Introduction and Conclusions.

Woods, N. 1996, The uses of theory in the study of international relations. In:
Woods. N. (ed.), Explaining International Relations since 1945 (Oxford: Oxford
University Press), chapter 1.

Smith, S. 1996, Positivism and beyond. In: Smith, S., Booth, K. and Zalewski, M.
(eds.), International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, pp. 11-44.

Wallace, W. 1996, Truth and power, monks and technocrats: theory and practice in
international relations. In: Review of International Studies, 22, 3, pp. 301-321, and the
responses by Booth, K. 1997, Discussion: a reply to Wallace. In: Review of
International Studies, 23, 3, pp. 371-377, and Smith, S. 1997, Power and truth: a reply to
William Wallace. In: Review of International Studies, 23, 4, pp. 507-516.

Further reading
Brown, C. 1997, Understanding International Relations, London: Palgrave, chapters 2, 3, 11.

Der Derian, J. 1989, The boundaries of knowledge and power in International

Relations. In: DerDerian, J. and Shapiro, M. J. (eds.), International/Intertextual
Relations: Postmodern Readings of World Politics, New York: Lexington Books, pp. 3-10.

Enloe, C. 1996, Margins, silences and bottom rungs: how to overcome the
underestimation of power in the study of international relations. In: Smith, S., Booth, K. and
Zalewski, M. (eds.), International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 186-202.

George, J. 1995, Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re)Introduction to

International Relations, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, chapter 1.

Jackson, R. H. and Srensen, G. 1999, Introduction to International Relations, Oxford:

Oxford University Press, chapters 7 and 8.

Smith, S. 1995, The self-images of a discipline: a genealogy of international relations theory.

In: Booth, K. and Smith, S. (eds.), International Relations Theory Today, Oxford: Polity, pp. 1-
37.

Steans, J. 2003 Engaging from the Margins: Feminist Encounters with the Mainstream of
International Relations.. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, , 5, 3, pp.428-
454.

Week 3 Critical Theory

This lecture will introduce you to Critical Theory, including influences from Marxism,
the Frankfurt School and later scholars who have followed in this tradition. You will be
introduced to key ideas themes in Gramscis thought including world order and
hegemony, hegemonic elites and hegemonic projects, ideology, counter
hegemony/counterhegemonic projects, praxis and emancipation. You will also gain a
basic understanding of Habermasian inspired theories of communicative action,
dialogue and discourse ethics and how key concepts and ideas have found
application in IR.

Learning outcomes
1. You will have a basic grasp of key concepts in Gramscian theory and how they
have been applied in the study of IR.

2. You will have a basic grasp of key concepts derived from the Frankfurt School of
Critical Theory and understand how these have been applied in IR.

3. You will understand how Critical Theory is located in the Western intellectual
traditions of the Enlightenment, specifically with respect to the Universalist ambition
of Critical theory and the commitment to an emancipatory praxis.

Core reading
Steans, J. and Pettiford, L, Diez, T., El-Anis, I. 2010, Introduction to International Relations
Theory: Perspectives and Themes, London: Pearson, chapter 4.

Cox, R. 1986, Social forces, states and world orders: beyond international relations
theory. In: Keohane, R. (ed), Neorealism and its Critics, New York, NY: Columbia
University Press, pp. 204-254.

George, Jim and Campbell, David, 1990 Patterns of Dissent and the Celebration of
Difference: Critical Social Theory and International Relations, International Studies
Quarterly 34(3), pp.269-293

Further reading
Cox, R. 1987, Production, Power and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of
History, New York: Columbia University Press.

Gill, S. (ed.) 1993, Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations,

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Linklater, A. 1996 The Achievements of Critical Theory. In: Smith, S., Booth, K. and

Zalewski, M. (eds) International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Linklater, A. 1990 Beyond Realism and Marxism: Critical Theory and International
Relations, Basingstoke: Macmillan.

Week 4 Constructivisms

During this week you will be introduced to a range of approaches that might be
variously situated along the broad spectrum of constructivism in IR. You will be
introduced to what is often described as conventional constructivism, illustrated here
by the work of Alexander Wendt and you will gain an understanding of why this
approach is sometimes described as a middle-ground position between the
rationalism of traditional theories like neorealism and neoliberal institutionalism and
the radical constructivism of poststructuralist approaches. In the process, you be
introduced to some of the major preoccupations of constructivism, including issues of
identity, the constructed nature of identities and norms and the role of regimes and
institutions in international relations. With respect to poststructuralism particularly,
you will be introduced to core preoccupations with issues of power/knowledge and
questions of identity and you will come to appreciate key differences between
conventional and radical constructivisms, particularly with regard to ontological
issues.

Learning Outcomes
1. You will gain a basic knowledge and understanding of a range of constructivist
positions within IR and the different intellectual traditions from which they draw.

2. You will understand key differences between conventional constructivism and

radical forms of constructivism, including poststructuralism.

3. You will understand the implications and import of the middle-ground debate in IR
and understand why it matters.

4. You have a grasp of key concepts in constructivism.

Core Reading
Adler, E. 1997, Seizing the middle ground: constructivism in world politics. In:
European Journal of International Relations 3, 3, pp. 319-363.

Steans, J et all (2010) Introduction to International Relations: Perspectives and

Themes, chapters on Social Constructivism (7) and Postmodernism (5).
Further reading (Poststructuralism)
Ashley, R. K. 1988, Untying the sovereign state: a double reading of the anarchy
problematique. In: Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 17, 2, 227-262.
[short loan photocopies]

Ashley, R. K. 1995, The power of anarchy: theory, sovereignty, and the

domestication of global life. In: Der Derian, J. (ed.), International Theory: Critical
Investigations, Manchester: Manchester University Press, pp. 94-128.

Ashley, R. K. 1996 The Achievements of Poststructuralism pp.240-253 in Steve

Smith, Ken Booth and Marysia Zalewski (eds), International Theory: Positivism and

Beyond, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Campbell, D., 1998, National Deconstruction: Violence, Identity, and Justice in

Bosnia, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Connolly, W. E. 1991, Identity \ Difference: Democratic Negotiations of Political

Paradox, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press

Doty, Roxanne Lynn, 1996, Imperial Encounters, London and Minneapolis, MN:
University of Minnesota Press

Der Derian, James and Shapiro, Michael, (eds), 1989, International/ Intertextual
Relations: Postmodern Readings of World Politics, Lexington: Lexington Books

George, J. 1995, Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re)Introduction to

International Relations, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, chapter 8.

Jarosz, Lucy, 1992, Constructing the Dark Continent: Metaphor as Geographic

Representation of Africa., Geografiska Annaler Series B Human Geography, 74(2),
pp.105-115

Neumann, I. B. 1996, Self and other in international relations. In: European Journal
Of International Relations, 2, 2, pp. 139-174.

Smith, Steve, 1996, Positivism and Beyond., pp.11-46 in Steve Smith, Ken Booth
And Marysia Zalewski (eds), International Theory: Positivism and Beyond,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Walker, R. B. J., 1993, Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory,

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Weber, Cynthia, 1995, Simulating Sovereignty: Intervention, the State and Symbolic
Exchange, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Weber, Cynthia, 2001, International Relations: A Critical Introduction, 2nd edn,

London: Routledge.

Social Constructivism
Wendt, A. 1999, Social Theory of International Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Christiansen, T., et al. (eds.) 2001, The Social Construction of Europe,London: Sage,
chapter 1.
Weber, C. 2001, Constructivism: Is anarchy what states make of it? In: Weber, C.,
International Relations Theory: A Critical Introduction, London, Routledge, pp. 59-80.

Christiansen, T., et al. 2001 (eds.), The Social Construction of Europe, London:
Sage.
Finnemore, M. 1996, National Interests in International Society, Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press.

Guzzini, S. 2000, A reconstruction of constructivism in International Relations. In:

European Journal of International Relations 6, 2, pp. 147-182.

Katzenstein, P. J. 1996 (ed.), The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in
World Politics, New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 33-75.

Kratochwil, F. 2000, Constructing a new orthodoxy? Wendts Social Theory of

International Politics and the constructivist challenge. In: Millennium: Journal of
International Studies 29, 1, pp. 73-101.

Kratochwil, F. and Ruggie, J. G. 1986, International Organization: The State of the

Art on the Art of the State. In: International Organization 40, 4, pp. 753-775.

Kubalkova, V. et al. 1998 (eds.), International Relations in a Constructed World,

Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.

Palan, R. 2000, A world of their making: an evaluation of the constructivist critique in

international relations. In: Review of International Studies 26, 4, 575-598.

Reus-Smit, C. 2001, Human rights and the social construction of sovereignty. In:
Review of International Studies 27, 4, 519-538.

Risse, T. et al. 1999 (eds.), The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and
Domestic Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ruggie, J. G. 1998, Constructing the World Polity: Essays on International

Institutionalization, London: Routledge, pp. 1-39.

Wver, O. 1997, Figures of international thought: introducing persons instead of

paradigms. In: Neumann, I. B. and Wver, O. (eds.), The Future of International
Relations: Masters in the Making, London: Routledge, pp. 1-37.

Hansen, Lene, 2006, Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War,
London: Routledge

Biersteker, Thomas and Weber, Cynthia, (eds), 1996, State Sovereignty as Social
Construct, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Week 5 The Postcolonial Challenge

The focus here is on the way in which postcolonialism challenges the Eurocentricity
of most IR theory, including the critical theories examined in Week 2, and proposes
alternative approaches. The lecture will examine certain postcolonial critiques and
the way in which they address the power/knowledge nexus. We shall also consider
some of the problems that seem to be inherent in postcolonial theory, especially in
terms of a West./.non-West. dichotomy.

Learning outcomes
By the end of the lecture you should be able to:
Recount the major epistemological, conceptual and theoretical issues raised by
postcolonial IR theorists.
Understand the assumptions underpinning different postcolonial accounts of
International Relations.
Identify possible problems in postcolonial critiques of Western. IR theory.

Core reading

Steans, J. and Pettiford, L, Diez, T., El-Anis, I. 2010, Introduction to International Relations
Theory: Perspectives and Themes, London: Pearson, chapter 13

Agathangelou, Anna and Ling, Lily, 2004, The House of IR: From Family Power
Politics to the Poisies of Worldism., International Studies Review, 6 (1), pp.21-49

Barkawi, Tarak and Laffey, Mark, 2006, The Postcolonial Moment in Security
Studies., Review of International Studies, 32(2), pp.329-352

Tickner, Arlene, 2003, Seeing IR Differently: Notes from the Third World.,
Millennium, 32(2), pp.295-324

Further reading
Sengupta, M, 2010, A Million Dollar Exit from the Anarchic Slum-world: Slumdog
Millionaire's hollow idioms of social justice, Third World Quarterly, 31 (4), 599-616.

Agnew, John and Corbridge, Stuart, 1995, Mastering Space: Hegemony, Territory
and
International Political Economy, London; New York: Routldge

Barkawi, Tarak and Laffey, Mark, 2002 Retrieving the Imperial: Empire and
International Relations, Millennium, 31(1), 109-127 (see also debate and responses
in International Affairs, 83 (1), 2007 , pp. 165-186.

Chowdry, Geeta and Nair, Sheila, 2002, Power, Postcolonialism and International
Relations: Reading Race, Gender and Class, London: Routledge

Das, Runa, 2003, Postcolonial (In)securities, the BJP and the Politics of Hindutva.,
Third World Quarterly, 24(1), pp.77-96

Dirlik, Arif, 1999, The Postcolonial Aura: Third World Criticism in the Age of Global
Capitalism, Boulder, CO: Westview Press

Franklin, M. I., 2001, Postcolonial Subjectivities and Everyday Life Online.,

International Feminist Journal of Politics, 3(3), pp.387-422

Grovogui, Siba N. 2007, Postcolonialism. in Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki and Steve Smith,
International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity, Oxford: Oxford University
Press.

Hill, Jonathan, 2005, Beyond the Other? A Postcolonial Critique of the Failed State
Thesis., African Identities, 3(2), pp.139-154

Hoogvelt, Ankie, 2001, Globalisation and the Postcolonial World: The New Political
Economy of Development, Basingstoke: Palgrave

Krishna, S., 2001, Race, Amnesia and the Education of International Relations.,
Alternatives, pp.

Krishna, S. 1993. "The Importance of Being Ironic: A Postcolonial View on Critical.

International Relations Theory." Alternatives, 18, pp. 385-417.

Lawson, Stephanie, 2006, Culture and Context in World Politics, Basingstoke,

Palgrave Macmillan.

Ling, Lily, 2001, Postcolonial International Relations: Conquest and Desire Between
Asia and the West, Basingstoke: Palgrave

McCormack, Brian, 2002, Postcolonialism in an Age of Globalisation: Opening up

International Relations Theory to Identities in Movement., Alternatives, pp.

Mohanty, Chandra Talpade, 1991 Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and
Colonial Discourses., pp.51-80 in C. T. Mohanty, A. Russo, and L. Torres, eds., 1991
Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism, Bloomington and Indianapolis:
Indiana University Press

Paolini, A., et al., 1999, Navigating Modernity: Postcolonialism, Identity and

International Relations, London and Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner

Said, Edward, 2003, Orientalism London: Penguin

Said, Edward, 1994, Culture and Imperialism, London: Vintage

Sylvester, Christine, 1999, Development Studies and Postcolonial Studies: Disparate

Tales of the Third World.., Third World Quarterly, 20(4), pp.704-721

Varadarajan, Latha 2004 Constructivism, identity, and neoliberal insecurity,. Review

of International Studies, 30(3), 319-341

Week 6 Study Week

No Lectures or Seminars. Use this week to catch- up on your reading.

Week 7 Feminist Interventions and Perspectives

This lecture discusses gender in IR.. The lecture covers the feminist critique of
mainstream IR theory and, especially, the contribution of feminist thought to a
number of long established area of study within IR, such as the state, conflict and
security, and the development of new approaches to the study of world politics.

Learning outcomes
By the end of the lecture you should:
Be able to recount the major epistemological, conceptual and theoretical issues
raised by feminist IR theorists.
Be able to summarise and discuss feminist critiques of traditional approaches to
IR.
Have some understanding and knowledge of how feminist scholarship has
contributed to our understanding of the key areas of study in IR.

Core reading
Steans, J. 2006 (Second Edition) Gender and International Relations, Cambridge:
Polity Press.

Steans, J. and Pettiford, L, Diez, T., El-Anis, I. 2010, Introduction to International Relations
Theory: Perspectives and Themes, London: Pearson, chapter 4.

Shepherd, L. (2009) Gender Matters in International Relations, London: Palgrave.

Marysia Zalewski (2009) Feminism and the Transformation of International Relations

(New International Relations), London: Routledge.

Jones, A. (2008) Gender Inclusive: Writings on Violence, Men, and Feminist

International Relations, London: Routledge.

Ackerly, B.; Stern, M. and True, J. (2006) Feminist Methodologies for International
Relations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Further reading
Peterson, V. Spike 1992 (ed) Gendered States: Feminist (Re)Visions of IR, London:
Lynne Rienner, especially Introduction.

Connell, R.(1995) Masculinities, University of California Press

Zalewski, M. and Parpart, J. (1997) (eds) The Man. Question in International

Relations

Hooper, C. (2001) Masculinities, International Relations and Gender Politics. New

York: Columbia University Press

Prease, B. and Pringle, K. (2001) A Man.s World? Changing Men.s Practices in a

Globalised World, London: Zed Books.

Enloe, Cynthia, 2000, Bananas, Beaches and Bases (2nd ed.), Berkeley: University
of California Press

Enloe, Cynthia, 1996, Margins, Silences and Bottom Rungs: How to Overcome the
Underestimation of Power in International Relations. pp.186-202 in Booth, Ken,
Smith, Steve & Zalewski, Marysia, (eds.), International Theory: Positivism and
Beyond, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Enloe, Cynthia, 1993, The Morning After: Sexual Politics after the Cold War, Berkley,
CA: University of California Press.

Enloe, Cynthia, 1983, Does Khaki Become You? The Militarization of Women.s Lives,
London: Pluto Press

Peterson, V. S. and Runyan, A. S. 1993, Global Gender Issues, Boulder, CO:

Westview Press.

Pettman, J. J. 1996, Worlding Women: A Feminist International Politics, London:

Routledge.
Tickner, J. A. 1992, Gender in International Relations, New York, NY:Columbia
University Press.

Tickner, J. A. 1996, Revisioning Security. In: Booth, K. and Smith, S. (eds.),

International Relations Theory Today, Oxford: Polity, pp. 175-197.

Turpin, J. and Lorentzen, L. 1996, The Gendered New World Order: Militarism,
Development and the Environment, London: Routledge.

Harding, S. 1990, Feminism, science and the anti-Enlightenment critiques. In:

Nicholson, L. (ed), Feminism/Postmodernism, London: Routledge, pp.83-106.

Steans, J. 2003 Engaging from the Margins: Feminist Encounters with the
Mainstream of International Relations. British Journal of Politics and International
Relations, 5(3), pp.428-454

Sylvester, Christine, 2002, Feminist International Relations: An Unfinished Journey,

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Sylvester, Christine, 1994, Feminist Theory and International Relations in a

Postmodern Era, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Zalewski, Marysia, 1995, Well, What is the Feminist Perspective on Bosnia?.,

International Affairs 71 (2), pp.339-356

Week 8 Theorising Security

Traditionally, security in international politics has been defined in terms of security

against military threat. Increasingly, however, this understanding of security has been
seen as being too limited. Some would even argue that military security is often in
conflict with the security of the environment, or the security of an individual or even
groups of people. This has led to a fierce debate within Security Studies between
those who would like to see the concept of security expanded and who often build on
critical or constructivist approaches, and those who want to stick to its narrow,
military definition. This lecture provides an overview of this debate and an alternative
conceptualisation of security as discourse.

Learning Outcomes

You should know the different possible dimensions of security

You should be able to relate particular understandings of security to their
underlying theoretical or normative concerns.
You should be able to provide examples for different forms of security, and assess
to what extent these different forms interact in these examples.

Core reading

Dalby, Simon, 1997, Contesting an Essential Concept: Reading the Dilemmas in

Contemporary Security Discourse, pp.3-32 in K. Krause and M. C. Williams, (eds),
Critical Security Studies: Concepts and Cases, London: UCL Press

Weldes, Jutta, Laffey, Mark, Gusterson, Hugh and Duvall, Raymond, 1999
Introduction: Constructing insecurity, pp. 1-33 in Weldes, Laffey, Gusterson, and
Duvall, (eds), Cultures of Insecurity: States, Communities and the Production of
Danger, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press

Baldwin, David, 1997, The Concept of Security, Review of International Studies 23,
pp.5-26

Further reading
Adler, E. and Barnett, M. (eds) 1998, Security Communities, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Andreas, Peter, 2003 Redrawing the line: Borders and security in the twenty-first
century, International Security, 282, pp.78-111
Bilgin, Pilar, 2003, Individual and Societal Dimensions of Security, International
Studies Review 5, pp.203-222

Booth, Ken, 1991, Security and Emancipation, Review of International Studies, 17,
pp.313-326

Broadhead, Leeanne, 2000, Re-Packaging Notions of Security: A Skeptical Feminist

Response to Recent Efforts pp.27-44 in Susie Jacobs, Ruth Jacobson and Jennifer
Marchbank, (eds), States of Conflict: Gender, Violence and Resistance, London: Zed
Books

Buzan, B. 1991, People, States and Fear: An Agenda for International Security
Studies, London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, second edition.

Campbell, David, 1998, Writing Security: United States Foreign Policy and the
Politics of Identity (rev. edn), Manchester: Manchester University Press

Chilton, P. 1995, Security Metaphors: Cold War Discourse from Containment to

Common House, New York: Peter Lang.

Croft, S. and Terriff, T. (ed.) 2000, Critical Reflections on Security and Change,
London: Frank Cass [available as Contemporary Security Policy, 20, 3 (1999)].

Dillon, Michael and Reid, Julian, 2001, Global liberal governance: Biopolitics,
security and war, Millennium, 30(1), pp. 41-66.

Farrell, T. (2002), Constructivist Security Studies: Portrait of a research program. In:

International Studies Review, 4, 1, pp. 49-72.
Katzenstein, P. J. (ed) 1996, The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in
World Politics, New York: Columbia University Press.
Krause, K. and Williams, M. C. (eds.) 1997, Critical Security Studies, Minneapolis,
MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Krause, Keith and Williams, Michael, 1996, Broadening the Agenda of Security
Studies, Mershon International Studies Review 40, pp.229-254

Kupchan C., and Kupchan, C., 1995, The Promise of Collective Security,
International Security 20 1, pp.52-61

Lipschutz, R. D. (ed) 1995, On Security, New York: Columbia University Press.

McSweeney, B. 1999, Security, Identity and Interests: A Sociology of International

Relations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Paris, Roland, 2001, Human Security: Paradigm Shift or Hot Air? International
Security 26 2, pp.87-102

Peterson, V. Spike, 1992, Security and Sovereign States: What is at Stake in Taking
Feminism Seriously?, pp.31-64 in V. Spike Peterson, (ed.), Gendered States:
Feminist ReVisions of International Relations Theory, London: Lynne Rienner

Shultz, R. H. et al. (eds) 1997, Security Studies for the 21st Century, Washington,
DC: Brasseys.

Walt, Stephen M., 1991 The Renaissance of Security Studies, International Studies
Quarterly 352 pp. 211-239

Young, Iris Marion, 2003, The Logic of Masculinist Protection: Reflections on the
Current Security State Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 29(1), pp.1-
25

Week 9 Theorising the War on Terror I

This week we explore the ways in which the War on Terror. (WOT) is linked to a
specific set of discourses in contemporary world politics. We will consider different
perspectives on the WOT with a particular emphasis on critical perspectives.

Learning outcomes
By the end of this lecture you should:

Understand the ways in which different theorists have made sense of the war on
terror.
Be able to identify the key assumptions on which these different theories rest.
Be able to explain and defend your own theoretically informed perspective on the
War on Terror.

Core readings
Chomsky, Noam, 2003, Wars of Terror. ,New Political Science 251 pp.113-127.

Kiras, James (2008), Terrorism and Globalization. in J. Baylis, S. Smith and P.

Owens (eds), The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International
Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jackson, Richard, 2007, Constructing Enemies: Islamic Terrorism. in Political and

Academic Discourse., Government and Opposition 42 (3), pp. 394426.

Further Reading
Booth, Ken and Dunne, Tim, (eds), 2002 Worlds in Collision: Terror and the Future of
Global Order London: Palgrave

Butler, Judith, 2004, Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence, London:
Verso

Cloud, Dana, 2004 To Veil the Threat of Terror: Afghan Women and the <Clash of
Civilisations in the Imagery of the U.S. War on Terrorism. Quarterly Journal of
Speech 90(3), pp.285-306

Giroux, Henry, 2004, Education After Abu Ghraib: Revisiting Adorno.s Politics of
Education., Cultural Studies 186, pp.779-815.

Gunning, Jeroen (2007), A Case for Critical Terrorism Studies? Government and
Opposition 42 (3), pp. 363393.

Jackson, Richard 2005, Writing the War on Terrorism : Language, Politics and
Counter-terrorism, Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Nuzzo, Angelica, 2004, Reasons for conflict: Political implications of a definition of

terrorism,. Metaphilosophy, 35(3), pp. 330-344

Scraton, Peter, (ed.), 2002, Beyond September 11: An Anthology of Dissent, London:
Pluto

Wallerstein, I. (2001) America and the World: The Twin Towers as Metaphor
SocialScience Research Council (available at: http://www.ssrc.org/sept11/wallerstein)

Weber, Cindy 2002, Flying Planes Can Be Dangerous., Millennium 31(1), pp.129-147

Week 10 Theorising the War on Terror II

DVD Presentation: The Power of Nightmares

This video presentation provides valuable critical insights into the social, cultural and
political context of the WOT and the discourses surrounding it. The readings for this
week also focus more on the ways in which representations (eg through speeches,
photographs, film, TV programmes, academic theory etc.) function to constitute
different understandings of the WOT. The video itself highlights key themes including
the problem of defining terrorism.

Note that the video, which comes in several parts, is available on YouTube.
Learning outcomes
By the end of this session you should be able to:
Understand the complex interplay of representation, power and discourse in the
context of the war on terror.
Explain the continuity or shifts in the construction of the war on terror.
Understand why war. and terror have been represented in scare quotes
throughout this syllabus.

Core readings
Der Derian, James, 2005, Imaging Terror: Logos, Pathos and Ethos. Third World
Quarterly 26 (1), pp.23-37

Morris, Rosemary 2004, Images of Untranslatability in the US War on Terror.,

Interventions 63, pp. 401-423

Tracy, J. 2005, Bearing Witness to the Unspeakable: 9/11 and America.s New Global
Imperialism. The Journal of American Culture 28 (1), pp.85-99

Further readings
Altheide, David 2004, Consuming Terrorism,. Symbolic Interaction, 27 (3), pp. 289-
308.

Amir, S. (2001) US Hegemony and the Response to Terror, Monthly Review

(available at:http://monthlyreview.org/1101amin)

Anderson, Perry 2002, Force and consent,. New Left Review, 17, pp. 5-30.

Archibugi, D. (2001) Terrorism and Cosmopolitanism. London: Social Science

Research Council (available at http://www.ssrc.org/sept11/essays/archiburgi)

Bluth, Christopher 2004, The British road to war: Blair, Bush, and the decision to
invade Iraq, International Affairs, 805, 871-892.

Bobrow, Davis B. 2004, Losing to terrorism: An American work in progress,.

Metaphilosophy, 35(3), pp. 345-364.

Cole, David 2003, Enemy Aliens: Double Standards and Constitutional Freedoms in
the War on Terrorism, New York: New Press,

Collins, John and Glover, Ross, (eds), 2002. Collateral Language: A User.s Guide to
America.s New War, NY: New York University Press,

Dobson, Alan P., 2002, The dangers of US interventionism,. Review of International

Studies, 28 (3), pp. 577-597.

Dunne, Thomas, 2002, After 9/11: What next for human rights?. The International
Journal of Human Rights, 6(2), pp. 93-102.

Enloe, Cynthia, 2004, Wielding Masculinity Inside Abu Ghraib: Making Feminist
Sense of an American Military Scandal. Asian Journal of Women.s Studies 10 (3),
pp.89-102

Halliday, Fred 2002, Two Hours that Shook the World: September 211, 2001, Causes
and Consequences, London: Saqi Books, pp. 31-50
Hawthorne, S. and Winter, B., (eds), 2002, September 11, 2001: Feminist
Perspectives, North Melbourne, Vic.: Spinifex

Holiday, Ian, 2002, When is a cause just?. Review of International Studies, 28 (3),
pp.
557-575.

Kelly, J.D., 2003, U.S. power after 9/11 and before it: If not an empire, then what?.
Public Culture, 15 (2), pp. 347-369.

Leaman, George, 2004, Iraq, American empire, and the war on terrorism,.
Metaphilosophy, 35(3), pp. 234-248

Margolis, Joseph 2004, Terrorism and the new forms of war,. Metaphilosophy,
35 (3), pp. 402-413

Mousseau, Michael, 2002/3, Market civilization and its clash with terror,.
International Security, 27 (3), pp. 5-29

Rockmore, Tom 2004, On the so-called war on terrorism,. Metaphilosophy, 35

(3), pp. 386-401.

Schwartz, Joseph M. 2004, Misreading Islamic terrorism: The war against

terrorism and just war theory,. Metaphilosophy, 35 (3), pp. 273-302.

Week 11 Theory in Practise: Lesson from Global Affairs

In this lecture, we will discuss how we can use theory to explain world politics. We
will revisit the theories from this term with a view to learn how we can deploy them in
order to reflect on events in global affairs and we will focus on many different
examples of contemporary international relations in order to to do. This is also
important for your assignments, where your ability to use concepts to reflect on social
and political issue is important.

Learning outcomes
By the end of this session you should be able to:
Understand the different contributions of theories in reflecting on international
affairs.
Choose between different theories in order to reflect on specific examples of global
affairs.

Core Reading

For this week, you are asked to prepare a 'learning log' (1-2 pages max), where you
will choose a theory from this term in order to discuss a topic of current global affairs-
do not treat this as an essay and aim at a rather informal reflection of your thoughts
in a couple of paragraphs or some bullet-points. In preparing this brief, you are
encouraged to consult this week's slides, the reading list(s) that relate to the theories
you choose but also make your own research. Objective of this exercise is to learn
how to use a theory in order to critically reflect on a topic of international relations.

SECOND SEMESTER:

Lecturer: Dr. Marco Vieira

TOPIC: IDENTITY

Week 1

Boundaries and Community

This lecture will review debates in IR about the nature and constitution of community. I will
begin by defining community and explaining what community means in this context (i.e
political community), and suggest that invoking the idea of community immediately raises
questions of identity,society, norms, values, politics (conceptions of the good and projects to
realise this) and space. Second, I will consider the different and contrasting ways in which
realists and liberals have understood the nature of community, and the degree to which the
centrality of the state (and citizenship) in the study of IR has fundamentally shaped thinking
about community. I will also sketch briefly some of the ways in which critical theorists (in a
broad sense of the term) have challenged the privileging of nation/state/citizen in the
discourse of community. Third, I will outline the cosmopolitan/communitarian debate. At the
heart of this are questions about extent to which human beings owe obligations to the people
of the world rather than simply to fellow citizens.

Learning outcomes:
To be able to understand how community is conceptualised in different approaches
in IR
To be able to outline the the cosmopolitan/communitarian debate.
To be able to reflect on and discuss the extent to which human beings owe
obligations to the people of the world rather than simply to fellow citizens.

Core reading:

Archibugi, D. Cosmopolitan democracy and its critics: a review. European Journal of

International Relations 10(3): 437-473. ***available through electronic holdings at
www.elibrary.bham..ac.uk
Beitz, C. Cosmopolitan Ideals and National Sentiment, Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 80, 1987,
pp. 591-600. Available at http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/Beitz-Cosmopolitan-Ideals-and-
National-Sentiment.pdf (accessed on 16 August 2016).

Further Reading:

Archibugi, D., Held, D. and Kohler, M. Re-imagining Political Community, Oxford, Polity Press,
1998; Chapter 10 Political Community and the Cosmopolitan Order in Held, D. Democracy
and the Global Order, Oxford, Polity1997
Tilly, C. (2005) Identities, Boundaries and Social Ties, London, Paradigm. (chapter 1). Human
Development Report: A Human Face for Globalization (http://www.undp.org/hdro/E1).
Brown, C. International Relations Theory: New Normative Approaches, Hemel Hampstead,
Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992.
Brown, C. The Idea of World Community, in Booth, K. and Smith, S.(Eds) International
Relations Theory Today, Oxford, Polity Press.
1995; Linklater, A. The Transformation of Political Community, Oxford, Polity Press, 1998.
Kratochwil, F. Citizenship: On the Border of Order, in Lapid, J. and Kratochwil, F. The Return
of Culture and Identity in IR Theory.
Linklater, A. Citizenship and Sovereignty in the Post -Westphalian State, European Journal
of International Relations, Vol.2, No. 1, March 1996, pp. 77-103.
Avineri, S. and de- Shalit, A. (Eds) Communitarianism and Individualism, Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 1992.

Week 2

Migration, Sovereignty and Security

Learning outcomes:
To be able to understand the complex nature of international migration from an
interdisciplinary perspective.
To be able to outline the major implication that migration has for our understanding of
the state and borders.
To be able to reflect on and discuss how the experience of immigration might
challenge our understandings of national identities.

Core reading:

Aradau, C. (2010) Acts of European Citizenship: A Political Sociology of Mobility (with Jef
Huysmans and Vicki Squire), Journal of Common Market Studies 48(4): 945-965. ***available
through electronic holdings at www.elibrary.bham.ac.uk
Shain, Y and Barth, A. (2004) Diasporas and International Relations Theory. International
Organization 57(3): 449-479. ***available through electronic holdings at
www.elibrary.bham.ac.uk

Further reading:

Huysmans, Jef and Squire, Vicki (2009). Migration and Security. In: Dunn Cavelty, Myriam
and Mauer, Victor eds. Handbook of Security Studies. London, UK: Routledge.
Guild, E., (2009) Security and Migration in the 21 st Century, Cambridge, Polity Press, chapter
1.
Castles, S. 2000, Citizenship and Migration: Globalization and the Politics of Belonging,
Basingstoke: Macmillan (introductory chapter)
Munster, Rens Vans (2009), Securitizing Immigration. The Politics of Risk in the EU,
Basingstoke: Palgrave
Avtar, S. (ed) 1999, Global Futures: Migration, Environment and Globalization, Basingstoke:
Macmillan.
McGrew, A. and Held, D. (eds) 2000, The Global Transformation Reader, Oxford: Polity
Press, chapters 1, 18, 19, 23, 25.
Papastergiadia, N. 2000, The Turbulence of Migration: Globalization, Deterritorialization and
Hybridity, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Pellerin, H. 1996, Global Restructuring and International Migration: Consequences for the
Globalization of Politics. In: Kofman, E. and Youngs, G (eds.), Globalization: Theory and
Practice, London: Pinter.
Shapiro, M. J. and Alker, H. R. (eds.) 1996, Challenging Boundaries: Global Flows, Territorial
Identities, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Albert, M.; Jacobson, D. and Lapid, Y. (eds) 2001, Identities Borders Orders: Rethinking
International Relations Theory, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, Introduction
and Chapters 5 and 6.
Donnan, H. and Wilson, Thomas M. (1999), Borders: Frontiers of Identity, Nation and State,
Oxford: Berg, especially Chapters 1-3 and 8.
Albert, M. and Brock, L. 1996, Debordering the world of states: New spaces in international
relations. In: New Political Science 35, 1, pp. 69-109.
Anderson, M. 1996, Frontiers: Territory and State Formation in the Modern World, Cambridge:
Polity.
Diez, T. 1997, International ethics and European integration: federal state or network
horizon? In: Alternatives 22, 3, pp. 287-312.
Eliot, N. and Newman, D. (eds) 2000, Geopolitics at the End of the Twentieth Century: The
Changing World Political Map, London, Frank Cass.
Kratochwil, F. 1996, Citizenship: on the border of order2. In: Y. Lapid and F. Kratochwil (eds),
The Return of Culture and Identity in IR Theory, Boulder, CO, Lynne Rienner, pp. 181-200.
Newman, D. (ed.) 1999, Boundaries, Territory, and Postmodernity, London, Frank Cass.
Schofield, C. (ed.) 1994, Global Boundaries, London, Routledge.
Shapiro, M. J. and Alker, H. R. (eds.) 1996, Challenging Boundaries: Global Flows, Territorial
Identities, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Week 3

Multiculturalism and the Nation-State

Learning outcomes:
To be able to understand the concept of multiculturalism and why it is important in the
study of IR
To be able to outline the major implication that cultural diversity has for our
understanding of the state and citizenship
To be able to reflect on and discuss debates about liberal democracy, cultural
diversity and rights.

Core reading:

McLaren, L. (2012) The Cultural Divide in Europe: Migration, Multiculturalism, and Political
Trust, World Politics, vol.64, n.2, pp. 199-241. ***available through electronic holdings at
www.elibrary.bham.ac.uk
Brighton, S. (2007) British Muslims, multiculturalism and UK foreign policy: integration and
cohesion in and beyond the state. International Affairs, 83(1): 1-17. ***available through
electronic holdings at www.elibrary.bham.ac.uk

Further reading

Taylor, C., (1994), The Politics of Recognition, In Amy Gutmann, Multiculturalism: Examining
the Politics of Recognition, Princeton, Princeton University Press, pp.25-74.
Modood, T., 2007, Multiculturalism, Cambridge, Polity Press.
Brahm, G., and Modood, T., 2009, Liberal Democracy, Multicultural citizenship and the
Danish Cartoon Affair, In Brahm, G., and Modood, T, Secularism, Religion and Multicultural
Citizenship, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Phillips, A., 2007, Multiculturalism without Culture, Princeton, Princeton University Press.

TOPIC: INTERNATIONAL ORDER

Week 4

The End of History

This week and next week we will explore the ideas of two highly influential theorists whose
work generated an enormous amount of debate in the early post-Cold War period about the
likely shape of world order in the coming decades. The lecture this week will outline the key
points of Francis Fukuyamas arguments first presented in his 1989 article on The End of his
History which was followed by a book-length study in 1992. The lecture will also provide
some critical perspectives on Fukuyamas thesis as well as the global political context in
which it became so influential.
Learning outcomes:
By the end of this lecture you should:
Understand the social/ political context in which Fukuyama theorised the end of
history.
Be able to identify the key assumptions on which his theory rests.
Be able to explain several of the ways in which Fukuyamas thesis has been critiqued,
and defend these critical interjections.

Core readings:
Fukuyama, F (1992), The End of History and the Last Man, London, Hamish Hamilton.
The short essay version is:
Fukuyama, F (1989), The End of History?, The National Interest. May be found at:
http://www.unc.edu/home/rlstev/Text/Fukuyama%20End%20of%20History.pdf OR
http://www.wesjones.com/eoh.htm
Fukuyama, F. (2006) After the 'end of history'. Go to:
http://www.opendemocracy.net/democracy-fukuyama/revisited_3496.jsp
Brown, Chris 1999 History Ends, Worlds Collide Review of International Studies, 25(5),
pp.41-57. ***available through electronic holdings at www.elibrary.bham.ac.uk

Further reading:

Burns, Timothy, (ed.), 1994, After History? Francis Fukuyama and His Critics, London and
Lanham, MD: Littlefield Adams
Croucher, Sheila 2003 Perpetual Imaginings: Nationhood in a Global Era International
Studies Review 5(1), pp.1-24
Evans, Peter 1997, The eclipse of the state? Reflections on stateness in an era of
globalization, World Politics, 50 (1), pp. 62-87.
Fukuyama, Francis (1995), Reflections on the End of History, Five Years Later
History and Theory, Vol. 34, No. 2, Theme Issue 34: World Historians and Their Critics, pp.
27-43
Fukuyama, Francis, 2002, Has History Started Again?, Policy, 18 (2), pp.3-7
Graham, Phil et al., 2004, A Call to Arms at the End of History: A Discourse-Historical
Analysis of George W. Bushs Declaration of War on Terror, Discourse and Society, 15 (2-3),
pp.199-221
Gray, John, 1999, False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism London: Granta
Gray, John, 1998, Global Utopias and Clashing Civilizations: Misunderstanding the Present
International Affairs, 74 (1), pp.149-164
Held, David, 1988, Farewell nation state, Marxism Today, 32 December, pp. 12-17.
King, Anthony D., (ed.), 1991, Culture, Globalization, and the World System, London:
Macmillan
Ling, Lily 2000 Hypermasculinity on the rise again: A Response to Fukuyama on women and
World Politics International Feminist Journal of Politics 2 (2), pp.277-286
Mittelman, James H., 2000. The Globalization Syndrome: Transformation and Resistance,
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
Peet, Richard, 1993, Reading Fukuyama: Politics at the End of History, Political Geography,
12(1), pp.64-78, see also, Simon Dalbys Reading Peet, (Re)Reading Fukuyama: Political
Geography at The End of History and Richard Peets The End of Prehistory and the First
Human, both in the same volume. Irony of Western
Tsygankov, Andrei (2003), The Ideas in a Multicultural World: Russians' Intellectual
Engagement with the End of History and Clash of Civilizations, International Studies
Review, 5 (1), pp. 53-76.

Week 5

The Clash of Civilizations

Samuel Huntingtons clash of Civilizations thesis was in many ways a response to

Fukuyamas notion of the End of History. This lecture will outline Huntingtons key arguments
as well as key points of criticism. The lecture will also explore the ways in which both theses
can be seen as organizing logics for various discourses in world politics and the way in which
these have influenced the discursive construction of IR itself.

Learning outcomes:
By the end of this lecture you should:
Understand the context in which Huntington theorised the clash of civilizations.
Be able to identify the key assumptions on which his theory rests.
Be able to identify ways in which Huntingtons thesis has been critiqued, and explain
these critical interjections.
Understand the ways in which different theorists have made sense of the war on
terror.

Core readings:

Huntington, Samuel 2002, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World History
London: Free Press, chapters 1, 2 & 12.
Said, Edward, 2001, The Clash of Ignorance, The Nation, October issue, available at
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20011022/said
Katzenstein, P. (2010), ed., Civilizations in World Politics, Plural and Pluralist Perspectives,
London, Routledge, (intro).

Further reading:

Brown, Chris 1999 History Ends, Worlds Collide Review of International Studies, 25 (5),
pp.41-57
Chiozza, Giacomo, 2002, Is There a Clash of Civilizations? Evidence from Patterns of
International Conflict Involvement 1946-97, Journal of Peace Research, 39 (6), pp.711-734
Chirot, Daniel, 2001, A Clash of Civilizations or Paradigms? Theorizing Progress and Social
Change, International Sociology, 16(3), pp.341-360
Desch, Michael, 1998, Culture Clash: Assessing the Importance of Ideas in Security Studies,
International Security, 23 (1), pp.141-170
Henderson, Errol, 2004, Mistaken Identity: Testing the Clash of Civilizations Thesis in Light of
Democratic Peace Claims, British Journal of Political Science, 43, pp.539-563
Henderson, Errol and Tucker, Richard, 2001, Clear and Present Strangers: The Clash of
Civilizations and International Conflict, International Studies Quarterly, 45 (2), pp.317-338
Huntington, Samuel 1993, The Clash of Civilizations? Foreign Affairs Reader, New York: The
Council on Foreign Relations, see also responses by Fouad Ajami, Kishore Mahbubani,
Robert Bartley, Liu Binyan, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Albert Weeks and Gerard Piel in the same
volume
Hussein, Seifudein Adem 2001, On the End of History and the Clash of Civilization: A
Dissenters View Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 21(1)
Fox, Jonathan, 2002, Ethnic Minorities and the Clash of Civilizations: A Quantitative Analysis
of Huntingtons Thesis British Journal of Political Science 3 (2) pp. 415-434
Norris, Pippa and Inglehart, Ronald, 2002, Islam and the West: Testing the Clash of
Civilizations Thesis, John F. Kennedy School of Government Faculty Research Working
Papers Series, available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=316506
Russett, Bruce, Oneal, John and Cox, Michaelene 2000 Clash of Civilizations, or Realism
and Liberalism Dj vu? Some Evidence Journal of Peace Research 37(5) pp. 583-608 see
also Samuel Huntingtons Try Again: A Reply to Russett, Oneal and Cox pp. 609-610 and
John Oneal and Bruce Russetts A Response to Huntington pp. 611-612, all in the same
volume
Showalter, Dennis, 2002, Colliding Worlds and the Future of History, Journal of the Historical
Society, 11 (2), pp.153-161

Week 6

Study Week
You should use study week to catch up with your reading and begin planning
your essay.

Week 7

A Post-Western International Order? Emerging Challenges from the South

This lecture discusses the implications to world order of the rise of Southern emerging powers
in international politics. It covers different theoretical perspectives and arguments related to
the subject.

Learning outcomes:

By the end of this lecture you should:

Understand and evaluate different theoretical interpretations of the impact of

emerging South powers on contemporary international order
Understand the common identity, institutions and political/economic claims of the
South in world politics
Understand and critically discuss changes in South-South and North-South relations
due to economic globalization, the end of Cold War and the rise of new great powers
such as China, India and Brazil.
Be able to discuss new models of South-South cooperation in the 21 st century such
as the IBSA partnership and BRICS.

Core reading:

Hart, A. F., and Jones, B. J. (2011) How Do Rising Powers Rise? Survival 52 (6): 63-88.
***available through electronic holdings at www.elibrary.bham.ac.uk
Hurrell, A. (2014) Rising Powers and the Emerging Global Order, in: John Baylis, Steve
Smith and Patricia Owens, The Globalization of World Politics, Oxford, Oxford University
Press (6th Edition) (pp. 80-94).

Further reading:

Hurrell, A., (2006) Hegemony, Liberalism and Global Order: What Space for Would-Be Great
Powers? International Affairs 82(2), pp. 1-19. ***available through electronic holdings at
www.elibrary.bham.ac.uk
Ikenberry, J. (2009) Liberal Internationalism 3.0: America and the Dilemmas of Liberal World
Order, Perspectives on Politics, vol.7, n.1, pp. 71-87.
Vieira, M. (2012) Rising States and Distributive Justice: Reforming International Order in the
21st Century, Global Society, vol.26, n.3, pp.311-329.
Gills, B. K. (2010) Going South: Capitalist Crisis, Systemic Crisis, Civilisational Crisis, Third
World Quarterly, 31(2), pp. 169-184.
Alden, C., Morphet, S., and Vieira, M. (2010) The South in World Politics, Houndmills:
Palgrave Macmillan, (Intro, Ch.3, Conclusions).
Khana, P. (2008) The Second World: How Emerging Powers are Redefining Global
Competition in the 21st Century, London, Penguin.
Kupchan, C. A. (2012) No Ones World, The West, The Rising Rest, and the Coming Global
Turn, Oxford, OUP.
Bremmer, I. (2012) Every Nation for Itself: Winners and Losers in a G-Zero World, London,
Penguin.
Alden, C., and Vieira, M. (2005) The New Diplomacy of the South: South Africa, Brazil, India
and Trilateralism, Third World Quarterly 26(7), pp.1077-1095.
Six, Clemens (2010) The Rise of Postcolonial States as Donors: A Challenge to the
Development Paradigm, Third World Quarterly, vol. 30, n.3, p. 1103.
Palat, R. A. (2008) A New Bandung? Economic Growth vs. Distributive Justice among
Emerging Powers, Futures 40, pp. 721-734.
Cooper, A., Shaw, T., and Antikiewicz, A. (2007) Global and/or Regional Development at the
Start of the 21st Century? China, India and South Africa, Third World Quarterly 28(7), pp.
1255-1270.
Weiss, T. G. (2009) Moving Beyond North-South Theatre, Third World Quarterly, 30(2), pp.
271-284.
Zakaria, F. (2009) The Post-American World, and the Rise of the Rest, London: Penguin.
Bisley, Nick (2010) Global Power Shift: The Decline of the West and the Rise of the Rest? In,
Mark Beeson and Nick Bisley, Issues in 21st Century World Politics, Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan,
Narlikar, A. (2010) New Powers: How to Become One and How to Manage Them, London: C
Hurst & Co.
Braveboy-Wagner, J. (2008) Institutions of the Global South, London: Routledge.
Castro, J. A. A. (1972) The United Nations and the Freezing of the International Power
Structure, International Organization 26 (1), pp. 158-166.
Adams, N. (1993) Worlds Apart: The North-South Divide and the International System,
London: Zed Books.

TOPIC: NORMATIVE ISSUES

Week 8

Human Rights, Culture and Difference

This lecture covers the place of human rights in international relations. It covers the key
debate on the universality versus the specificity of human rights. It also covers a number of
critical and constructivist approaches to human rights that in distinctive ways attempt to move
beyond the universalism/particularism dichotomy.

Learning outcomes:

By the end of this lecture you should:

Know and appreciate liberal and English School perspectives on the role of human
rights in international relations.
Understand the major approaches to human rights in contemporary critical IR theory
Be able to re-evaluate the universalism/relativism debate from a number of critical
and constructivist positions.

Core reading:
Brown, C., and Ainley, K., 2005, 3RD ed, International Relations and the Individual: Human
Rights, Humanitarian Law and Humanitarian War, In Chris Brown and Kirsten Ainley,
Understanding International Relations, Basingstoke: Palgrave., pp.207-228.
Dunne, T. and Wheeler, N. J. (eds.) 1999, Human Rights in Global Politics, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, introduction.

Further reading:

Forsythe, D. 2001, Human Rights in International Relations, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, pp.3-27.
Donnelly, J. 1993, International Human Rights, Boulder, CO: Westview.
Afkhami, M. (ed.) 1995, Faith and Freedom: Womens Human Rights in the Muslim World,
New York, NY: Syracuse University Press.
Ackerly, Brooke, Womens Rights Activists as Cross-Cultural Theorists, International
Feminist Journal of Politics, Vol 3, No. 3, (2001), pp: 311-346 Joachim, Jutta Shaping the
Human Rights Agenda: The Case of Violence Against Women in Mary Meyer and Elizabeth
Prugl Gender Politics in Global Governance (Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield, 1999).
Wilson, R. (ed) Human Rights, Culture and Context: Anthropological Perspectives, (London:
Pluto Press, 1997).
Bottomley, A. (ed) Feminist Perspectives on the Foundational Subjects of Law (London:
Cavendish Publishing Limited, 1996)
Evans, T. (ed.) 1998, Human Rights Fifty Years On: An Appraisal, Manchester: Manchester
University Press.
Risse, T. and Sikkink, K. 1999: The Power of Human Rights, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
Chris Brown Human Rights in John Baylis and Steve Smith The Globalization of World
Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp: 689-708.

Week 9

The Environment and International Relations

This lecture covers the various theoretical perspectives outlined in this course and their
particular views on global environmental issues. It also discusses the main groups of actors,
institutions and cooperation problems involved in global environmental governance. Finally,
the lecture discusses moral issues involved in dealing with environmental degradation given
the widely accepted norm of common but differentiated responsibilities between developed
and developing nations.

Learning outcomes:

By the end of this lecture you should:

Understand and critically discuss the challenges posed to international relations

theory by global environmental problems
Be able to identify and discuss the main actors, institutions and interests involved in
global environmental politics
Understand and evaluate international environmental cooperation and the (lack of)
effectiveness of multilateral environmental agreements.
Understand the different/conflicting positions of developing and developed states on
how to address global environmental problems

Core Reading:

Baylis, J. and Smith, S. (eds.) 2014, The Globalization of World Politics: An

Introduction to International Relations, Oxford: Oxford University Press (6 th edition), chapter
22
Hurrell, A. and Sengupta, S. (2012) Emerging Powers and Global Climate Politics,
International Affairs, vol. 88, n.3, pp. 463-484. ***available through electronic holdings at
www.elibrary.bham.ac.uk

Further Reading:

ONeill, K. (2009) The Environment and International Relations, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, (chapters, 1, 3 and 8).
Vieira, M. (2012) Brazilian Foreign Policy in the Context of Global Climate Norms, Foreign
Policy Analysis, (article first published online, 10 July 2012: available
at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-8594.2012.00191.x/abstract).
Vogler, J. (2008) Environmental Issues, in: Baylis, J. and Smith, S. Owens, P. (eds.) 2005,
The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, Oxford: Oxford
University Press (fifth edition), pp. 352-368.
Carter, N. (2010) Climate Change and the Politics of the Global Environment, in M. Beeson
and N. Bisley, Issues in 21st Century World Politics, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Paterson, M. (2001) Understanding Global Environmental Politics:Domination, Accumulation,
Resistance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Najam, Adil (2005) Developing Countries and Global Environmental Governance: From
Contestation to Participation to Engagement, International Environmental Agreements, 5, pp.
303-321
Falkner, R. (2005) American Hegemony and the Global Environment, International Studies
Review 7(4), pp. 585-599.
Detraz, N. (2009) Environmental Security and Gender: Necessary Shifts in an Evolving
Debate, Security Studies 18(2), pp. 345-369.
Roberts, J. T. and Parks, B. (2007) A Climate of Injustice: Global Inequality, North-South
Politics, and Climate Policy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vogler, J. (1999) The EU as an Actor in International Environmental Politics, Environmental
Politics 8(3), pp. 24-48.
Conca, K. (2005) Environmental Governance after Johannesburg: From Stalled Legalization
to Environmental Human Rights? Journal of International Law & International Relations 1 (2),
pp. 121-138.
Detraz, N. and Betsill, M. M. (2009) Climate Change and Environmental Security: For Whom
the Discourse Shifts. International Studies Perspectives 10(3).
Giddens, A. (2009) The Politics of Climate Change. Cambridge: Polity
Hurrell, A. and Kingsbury, B., (eds) (1992) The International Politics of the Environment,
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Week 10

Revision

Week 11

Short film presentation and discussion (TBC)